Who was right?

[diddyriddick]

I've actually posted this on another forum, but wanted to get y'all's feedback. Because y'all are generally more versed specifically on WWII, you get the Reader's Digest Condensed version. If you want the unabridged version, check at the following link:

Who was right? - Historum - History Forums

Raymond Spruance was criticized for not pursuing the IJN on the second day of the battle of the Philippine Sea.

A few months later, William Halsey went after many of the same ships that Spruance had declined to pursue. Leaving the 7th fleet's right flank exposed, Halsey also received criticism, though not from the same sources.

So who was right?

 

[BombTaxi]

Spruance was right. Halsey compromised the integrity of the entire mission by chasing off after the Japanese, and if it weren't for the heroic actions of the jeep carriers, the invasion fleet could have been wiped out. The commander's priority should always be mission first, glory second, and that, IMHO, is where Halsey slipped up.

 

[vikingBerserker]

I'm a big fan of Halsey, but I have to agree he was wrong on this one.

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]

I agree Halsey made a mistake but I believe it was a mistake that anyone else could have just as easily made. They were intent on ridding Japan of all of their mobile air cover and when the carriers and battleships were spotted it was an opportunity to good to pass up. Now hindsight is 20/20 and we have that advatage. Halsey did not. The Japanese used the carriers as a decoy and it got the admirals attention. Halsey took into consideration all of the information he had at hand from what I can gather and made the best decision in his mind. All I am saying is don't be to judgemental. It is easy for us to look back and say he screwed up.

 

[BombTaxi]

It is easy to look back with hindsight and say it was a mistake, but the key to successful leadership in any field, military or civil, is to keep focused on the objective. The cost of taking out the last of Japan's mobile airpower might have been thousands of US servicemen and a severe setback to the Pacific campaign as a whole. That is a big price to pay when the USN had effective air superiority anyway...

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]

"the key to successful leadership in any field, military or civil, is to keep focused on the objective."

I fully agree. But if memory serves me correct (and it may not) none of our searches had turned up the other battle group coming in. I will agree it was a mistake but I honestly believe it was an honest mistake. I don't think that he would have gone off and left the smaller force to deal with what was coming had he known that the carriers were a feint. Again, this is just my opinion.

 

[diddyriddick]

"the key to successful leadership in any field, military or civil, is to keep focused on the objective."

I fully agree. But if memory serves me correct (and it may not) none of our searches had turned up the other battle group coming in. I will agree it was a mistake but I honestly believe it was an honest mistake. I don't think that he would have gone off and left the smaller force to deal with what was coming had he known that the carriers were a feint. Again, this is just my opinion.

Actually, no. Halsey had actually hit Kurita's force in the Sibuyan Sea sinking Musashi. He then left to chase Ozawa with the decoy force at Cape Engano. I read that "Engano" translates as "deception." if so, what a great irony.